Maxava Versus Vision Solutions Trial Date Delayed Again
April 8, 2013 Alex Woodie
Instead of prepping for trial next month, participants in Maxava‘s false advertising and trade libel lawsuit against Vision Solutions will be waiting–waiting for the judge in the case to issue summary judgment rulings, which will impact how they prepare for the trial, and maybe even lead to an out-of-court settlement.
In a filing made last week, Judge George Wu set a new trial date of August 6, and a new pretrial conference date of July 15. The previous pretrial conference date was May 2, and the previous trial date was May 28.
The delay was jointly requested on March 20 by both sides in the case. Both Vision and Maxava say the fact that Judge Wu has not ruled on the summary judgment requests both sides originally made in October 2011 is inhibiting them from making any headway in preparing for the pre-trial conference and the trial itself, let alone having a “meaningful meeting” together on March 22, as ordered by the court.
The delay is the latest in a string of delays in the case, which was originally filed by Maximum Availability (now known as Maxava) in December 2009, and was originally slated to go to trial in November 2011.
As recently as last fall, the trial was to begin April 2, but in November it was pushed back eight weeks due to a scheduling conflict of a lawyer for Vision co-defendant Sirius Computer Solutions, who had already committed to a pre-paid, two-and-a-half-week vacation.
Lawyerly getaways aside, participants are eager for Judge Wu to dig into the tens of thousands of pages of documents filed in the case and issue his judgments on summary motion requests. Vision wants the entire case thrown out for lack of proof of harm to Maxava as the result of the alleged false advertising. Maxava has consistently pleaded with the court to compel Vision to provide answers to questions posed during discovery.
Maxava originally alleged that Vision distributed advertising materials that contained false information about Maxava’s business and its products, and that these materials damaged its business. The court granted Maxava a temporary injunction against Vision in the middle of 2010.
In late 2010, Maxava amended its original compliant to include accusations of trade libel, interfering with prospective economic advantage, and anti-competitive, monopolistic behavior in violation of the Sherman Act. It also succeeded in adding Sirius to its lawsuit (its first attempt to include Sirius was quashed by the court).
The case is being tried in Judge Wu’s courtroom in the U.S. District Court Central District of California Western Division, which is based in Los Angeles. In December 2011, Judge Wu issued a tentative ruling that favored Vision; since Maxava has requested a jury trial, the ruling was merely advisory.
The judge’s tentative ruling bolstered Vision’s position that Maxava hasn’t adequately proved its case. Maxava, of course, wants a jury to make the ultimate determination. At some point–maybe a year or two from now, the way things are going–it may just get its wish.